The Childhood Origins of Adult Socioeconomic Disadvantage: Do Cohort and Gender Matter?

John Hobcraft and Wendy Sigle-Rushton

GeNet Conference14 December 2006

Queens’ College, Cambridge

Childhood Markers of Adult Disadvantage

Childhood Indicators:

Poverty

Housing

Social Class

Family Type

Parental Interest in School

Child Behaviour

Academic Test Scores

School Absences

Contact with Police

Adult Social Disadvantage:

Social Housing

Benefits

Household Income

Social Class

Education

Unemployment

Age at First Birth

Physical and Emotional Health

Research Questions

Are childhood and family antecedents the same? For both the 1958 and 1970 cohort? For both genders?

Do gender differentials change over time?

Data

Data: two prospective studies National Child Development Study (NCDS) British Cohort Study (BCS)

Baseline Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4 Wave 5

NCDSAge 0, 1958

Age 7, 1965

Age 11, 1969

Age 16, 1974

Age 23, 1981

Age 33, 1991

BCSAge 0, 1970

Age 5, 1975

Age 10, 1980

Age 16, 1986

Age 26, 1996

Age 30, 2000

Data

Data: two prospective studies National Child Development Study (NCDS) British Cohort Study (BCS)

Baseline Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4 Wave 5

NCDSAge 0, 1958

Age 7, 1965

Age 11, 1969

Age 16, 1974

Age 23, 1981

Age 33, 1991

BCSAge 0, 1970

Age 5, 1975

Age 10, 1980

Age 16, 1986

Age 26, 1996

Age 30, 2000

Data

Data: Two British Cohort Studies National Child Development Study (NCDS) British Cohort Study (BCS)

Baseline Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4 Wave 5

NCDSAge 0, 1958

Age 7, 1965

Age 11, 1969

Age 16, 1974

Age 23, 1981

Age 33, 1991

BCSAge 0, 1970

Age 5, 1975

Age 10, 1980

Age 16, 1986

Age 26, 1996

Age 30, 2000

Inputs and Outcomes

Childhood Indicators

Poverty (waves 2 & 3 only)

Housing

Social Class

Family Structure

Parental Interest in School (Wave 2 only)

Temperament (Aggression, Anxiety, Restlessness)

Academic Test Scores

Adult Disadvantage

In Social Housing

On Benefits

Low Household Income

Low Social Class

Measurement and Method

Majority of childhood indicators are summarised across multiple childhood waves

Hierarchical coding of dummies within groups

Step-wise Logistic Regression repeat backward and forward fitting strict significance threshold of p<0.001

Measurement and Method

Common or pervasive antecedents Same response, but different childhood experiences?

Evidence of cohort or gender (or both) differentials ‘Black-box’ main effects of cohort or gender Differential responses to same antecedent Additional antecedents

Results Summary

Main effects Retained for all outcomes (9 ‘pervasive’ measures)

Academic test scores Parental housing tenure Parental interest in education Temperament: aggression, restlessness Poverty

Significant links to Father’s social class ‘in care’ and ‘born out-of-wedlock’

Few links to social class of origin or other family structure

No link to anxiety

Results Summary

Very few interactions retained• For gender

• Social housing: social class of origin • Benefits: constant, any parental disruption• Low household income: missing parental interest in education• Low social class: social class of origin

• For cohort • Social housing: parental housing tenure• Benefits: parental housing tenure, parental interest in education• Low household income: Social class of father (x2), academic test

scores• Low social class: constant, social class of origin

• For gender and cohort • Low social class: parental housing tenure, social class of origin

Results Summary

Social Housing

Benefits Low hh Income

Low skill soc. class

All

Pervasive ‘main’

9 9 9 9 36

Other ‘main’

10 5 1 5 21

Gender 1 2 1 1 5

Cohort 1 2 3 2 8

Gender by cohort

0 0 0 2 2

All (of 179) 21 18 14 19

Conclusions

Childhood/family antecedents are linked to subsequent outcomes

Similarity and consistency in relationships

Gender and cohort differences often mediated by only a few variables Over-specification? Misleading results?